https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365550 Criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires proof of dishonour, non-payment after notice, and a legally enforceable debt or other liability for which the cheque was issued. The statutory presumption under Section 139 operates only until the contrary is shown. On the pleaded facts, the alleged liability was said to arise from services rendered by the complainant's sons, not by the complainant herself, and no service relationship or arrangement existed between the complainant and the petitioner. The complaint therefore failed to disclose the essential foundational liability needed to sustain a Section 138 proceeding, and quashing was warranted. en-us Tue, 07 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Aug 2018 07:47:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365550 Criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires proof of dishonour, non-payment after notice, and a legally enforceable debt or other liability for which the cheque was issued. The statutory presumption under Section 139 operates only until the contrary is shown. On the pleaded facts, the alleged liability was said to arise from services rendered by the complainant's sons, not by the complainant herself, and no service relationship or arrangement existed between the complainant and the petitioner. The complaint therefore failed to disclose the essential foundational liability needed to sustain a Section 138 proceeding, and quashing was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 07 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365550